Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, paraded real world witnesses of health care "disasters" in front of the media this morning. The one lady recounted her experience with cancer, which, she says, has changed her life. So far, I agree, it would.
However, her first thought upon hearing that she has cancer, was that she couldn't afford it even though she has bought "if I am hit by a bus" insurance, or, as I understood it, disaster insurance. That's a rather weird knee-jerk reaction, don't you think? Her insurance refused treatment at some point, as she feared, and her financial situation worsened, as she predicted.
Let's reason this out for a moment. If she had purchased disaster insurance that had limitations, wasn't that the choice she made when she bought the policy, putting her at risk should her medical situation exceed her chosen policy limitations? How is it your and my responsibility to prevent her from losing those assets (her home among other things) that she chose to put in peril by opting for other benefits, such as a lower premium?
Ordinarily, stage 4 cancer of anything would bring up thoughts of end-of-life choices, right? I am asking because I don't have any experience with this, but it seems as if affordability is not something that would trump thoughts about life, death, pain, suffering, and eternal things. It is significant that her first thought was affordability because she must have been troubled by the limitation choices she made on her policy. It was a calculated risk she took and lost when "the bus hit her," as she put it.
I don't blame her for trying to mitigate her losses, but the imposition of guilt onto all of us is shameful. Especially by our leaders.